• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.163-191
• /
• 2017

This article aims to review the recent, especially focusing on the year of 2016, situations and prospects of the Vietnamese politics, economy, and international relations. Politically, Vietnam completed the election of members for the National Assembly and organized new leadership at the 12th National Congress of the Vietnamese Communist Party in 2016. One characteristic of the new leadership is that the politicians, especially the members of politburo, from the North continue to occupy the position of majority. The other one is that the new leadership promised to carry out the restructuring of economy toward industries producing higher value-added commodities even though Vietnam industries admittedly need to accelerate present industrialization and modernization as a developing country under the seemingly contradictory slogan of "the development of market economy for socialism." The declared goals of the new leadership in Vietnam are inevitable in a sense since the development of Vietnamese economy has been heavily dependent upon Foreign Direct Investment(FDI) taking advantage of Vietnamese cheap labor and simultaneously it is evident that its future is unsecure if it maintains status quo. In fact, the Vietnamese economy has impressively showed high growth rate by the help of foreign capitals since 1990s despite the repetitive recessions of global economy but its growth is not likely to be sustainable anymore if it will not reduce foreign dependency and social economic inequality in a long term. In a short run, global economic recession, the financial and monetary policies of global powers, and recent protectionism and uncertainty of trade agreements will be three crucial variables to affect Vietnamese economy. In terms of international relations, Vietnam is continuously expected to practise the policy of checks and balances among the powerful countries. Vietnam has seriously disputed with China on islands sovereignty in the South China Sea and attempted to maintain close relationship with other powerful countries including especially America. However, mainly due to the new protectionism by the regime of American president Donald Trump, the Vietnamese government also need to keep close relationship with China increasingly for both economic and diplomatic security. Under the circumstances, Vietnam is expected to maintain more practical and balanced international relations.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.303-343
• /
• 2018

In 2013 a new era for EU patent law system was launched. The creation of the EU patent with unitary effect and the establishment of the Unified Patent Court established a new legal framework on substantive patent protection and patent litigation in Europe. This year the EU Patent Package would become a reality. It includes a regulation on a unitary patent, a regulation on the translation regime and an international Agreement on the Unitary Patent Court. In contrast to the classical European patent, the post-grant life of unitary patent will be governed by the newly created unified patent court and it will have unitary effect. In this article, I highlight the effect of the unitary patent and the jurisdiction of the unified patent court over unitary patents (and 'traditional' patents granted under the EPC that are not opted-out) for actions in relation to patent infringement or to revocation of a European patent and to licences of right. This article explores on the one hand the relation between national patent, the classical European patent and EU patent with unitary effect and on the other hand the relation of unified patent court to the Brussels $I^{bis}$ Regulation. Particular attention is paid to the institutional changes created by the unitary patent package abd the new supplementary forum that enables the UPC to hear disputes involving defendants from third States that relate to an infringement of a European patent and give rise to damage inside as well as outside the Union. Furthermore on the perspective North-east Asia this essay examines the lessons from the experiences of EU patent package.

• Korean Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.321-329
• /
• 2018

A study was carried out to determine the influence of climatic environments on the growth characteristics and bulb quality of extremely early-maturing type onion grown at different altitudes, such as 60m, 200m, 350m and 700m above sea level (ASL). The mean air temperature during the growing season of extremely early-maturing type onion (October 18 to April 27) was $10.8^{\circ}C$, $9.6^{\circ}C$, $8.1^{\circ}C$ and $6.1^{\circ}C$ at 60m, 200m, 350m and 700m ASL. The mean air temperature during the bulb growth period (March 16 to April 14) was recorded $10.5^{\circ}C$, $9.4^{\circ}C$, $7.9^{\circ}C$ and $6.0^{\circ}C$ at 60m, 200m, 350m and 700 m ASL. Plant height, neck diameter, leaf number, leaf area, top fresh weight and top dry weight were significantly increased in growing of extremely early-maturing type onion at 60m ASL. Bulb/neck diameter ratio increased rapidly under the same temperature regime. The diameter and weight of the bulb were also the largest at 60m ASL during the bulb growth period (daily mean temperature of $12.5^{\circ}C$). At 60m ASL, there was the highest bulb size like a height, diameter and weight of bulb related directly on onion yield in the bulb growth period from March 16 to April 14. In contrast, yield and bulb quality were considerably decreased at 700m ASL during the bulb growth stage (daily mean temperature of $8.4^{\circ}C$). The quantity of extremely early-maturing type onion has gradually decreased as the daily average temperature drops below $12.5^{\circ}C$ during the bulb growth stage (March 16 to April 14). As a result, the lower temperature (daily mean temperature below $12.5^{\circ}C$) during the bulb growth stage significantly decreased the size and quantity of bulb in direction proportion.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.35-59
• /
• 2018

Professor Bin Cheng said that outer space was res extra commercium, while the moon and the other celestial bodies were res nullius before the 1967 Outer Space Treaty(OST). However, Article 2 of the OST made the moon and other celestial bodies have the legal status as res extra commmercium, not appropriated by any country or private enterprises or individual person, but the resources there can be freely available, as those on the high seas. The non-appropriation principle was introduced to corpus juris spatialis internationalis. Whether or not the non-appropriation principle is binding for the non-parties of the OST, many scholars see this principle as an international customary law, even developing into jus cogens. Article 11(2) of the Moon Agreement(MA) reconfirms the nonappropriation principle of Article 2 of the OST, but it has much less effect than the OST because the MA binds only the 18 parties involved. The MA applies only to the moon and celestial bodies other than the Earth in the Solar System, the OST's application scope extends to the Galaxy because the OST has no such substantive enactment. As referred to in the 2015 CSLCA of USA or Luxembourg's Law of Space Resources, allowing individuals and enterprises run by other countries to commercially explore and utilize the space resources, the question may arise whether this violates the non-appropriation principle under Article 2 of the OST and Article 11 of the MA. In the case of the CSLCA, the law explicitly specifies that sovereignty, possessory rights, and judiciary rights to a specific celestial body cannot be claimed, let alone ownership. This author believes that this law respects the legal status of outer space and the celestial bodies as res extra commmercium. As long as any countries or private enterprises or individuals respect the non-appropriation principle of outer space and the celestial bodies, they could use, exploit it. Another question might be raised in the difference between res extra commercium on the high seas and res extra commercium in outer space and the celestial bodies. Collecting resources on the high seas and exploiting space resources should be interpreted differently. On the high seas, resources can be collected without any obstacles like fishing, whereas, in the case of the deep sea-bed area, the Common Heritage of Mankind principles under the UNCLOS should be operated by the International Seabed Authority as an international regime. The nature or form of the sea resources found on the high seas are thus different from that of space resources, which are fixed on the moon and the celestial bodies without water. Thus, if individuals or private enterprises collect these resources from outer space and the celestial bodies, they might secure a certain section and continue collecting or mining works without any limitation. If an American enterprise receives an approval from the U.S. government, secures the best location and collects resources on the moon, can other countries' enterprises access to this area? How large the exploiting place can be allotted on the moon? How long should such a exploiting activity be lasted? Under the current international space law, these matters might be handled according to the principle of "first come, first served." As a consequence, the international community should provide a guideline or a proposal for the settlement of any foreseeable disputes during the space activity to solve plausible space legal questions in the near future.